« PreviousContinue »
and unappropriated products of the earth, alone possess value in exchange. Nature has been lavish in her bounties, but man alone has given them exchangeable value. What I cannot appropriate, and of which every one has enough to satisfy his wants, may be extremely useful, but has no value—will fetch no price. The sunbeams that warm us, the air that supports life, and the water that slakes thirst, are all abundantly useful; but, as they are the produce of no man's labour, and no man can appropriate them to himself, they are of no value in the market.
“ Labour was the first price, the original purchasemoney that was paid for all things.” When all things lay in common, alike the gift of nature to all men, who would have the best right to say, This is mine? The man who first set his mark
it by his industry, and thereby gave it a value that could not be severed from it. It was thus, that labour originated appropriation, and appropriation exchangeable value.
As the power of creating exchangeable value is man's peculiar distinction, so there is no other order of the creation that practises barter, or the direct exchange of one commodity for another. Man is the only animal who contracts.“ Two greyhounds, in running down the same hare, have sometimes the appearance,” says Dr. Smith, “ of acting in some sort of concert. Each turns her towards his companion, or endeavours to intercept her, when his companion turns her towards himself. This, however, is not the effect of contract, but of the accidental concurrence of their passions in the same object at that particular time. Nobody ever saw a dog make a fair and deliberate exchange of one bone for another with another dog. Nobody ever saw one animal by its gestures and natural cries, signify to another, this is mine, that yours; I am willing to give you this for that.” When an animal wants to obtain something either of man or another animal, it does not exert its labour to produce another commodity of equivalent value, and thereby effect an exchange; its only resources are force or finesse; if stronger, it overpowers the possessor, if weaker, it seeks to overcome it by stratagem. A lion ravages its prey; a puppy fawns upon its dam, and a spaniel endeavours by a thousand attractions to engage the attention of his master at dinner, when it wants to be fed by him: but, civilization has made man superior; the title which he claims for himself to the produce of his industry, he recognises in another : what another possesses, and he wants, he seeks fairly to purchase by an equivalent amount of labour: thus are the interests of both promoted, and the necessity of fraud and violence superseded.
In the opinion of Mr. M‘Culloch, Locke was the first writer, who clearly apprehended, and fully developed, the creative power of labour. In his Essay on Civil Government, published in 1689, he says,
any one consider what the difference is between an acre of land planted with tobacco or sugar, sown with wheat or barley, and an acre of the same land
lying in common, without any husbandry upon it, and he will find the improvement of labour makes the far greater part of the value. I think it will be but a very modest computation to say, that of the products of the earth useful to the life of man, ninetenths are the effects of labour; nay, if we will rightly consider things as they come to our use, and cast up the several expenses about them, what in them is purely owing to nature, and what to labour, we shall find that in most of them, ninety-nine hundredths are wholly to be put on the account of labour.
“ There cannot be a clearer demonstration of any thing than several nations of the Americans are of this, who are rich in land and poor in all the comforts of life, whom nature having furnished as rich as any other people with the materials of plenty, that is, a fruitful soil, apt to produce in abundance what might serve for food, raiment, and delight; yet for want of improving it by labour, have not one-hundredth part of the conveniences we enjoy; and the king of a large and fruitful territory there feeds, lodges, and is clad worse than a day-labourer in England."
It would have formed a still more triumphant climax to this philosopher could he have foreseen how industry alone would transform the western waste into the site of a mighty empire, rivalling the first states of Europe, in power, wealth, and all the enjoyments of social life.
DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENTS.
Division of Labour--It saves Time--Improves Skill and Dex
terity-Suggests the Contrivance of Tools and Machinery~ Lessens the Cost of Production- Applicable chiefly to Mechanical Employments—Limited by Extent of the Market.
La bour being the source of wealth, and wealth of enjoyment, an important inquiry is, how it can be made most efficient in its production.
Prior to the invention of tools and implements, it is likely that a division of employments would be the first expedient devised. All men could not be occupied on the same object, some must cut wood, some fetch water, some fodder the cattle ; and the diversity in the taste and talent of each would naturally determine the nature of his trade. He who excelled in making bows and arrows would probably confine his industry to that occupation. Another would be dexterous in the chase, and limit himself to hunting. A third would be skilful in hutbuilding, and form a sort of house-carpenter. And another would be ready in the cutting and dressing of hides for clothing, and thus be the germ of a tailor or tanner. The practice of barter or exchange would necessarily grow out of this separation of pursuits. The armourer who made bows and arrows would have more than needful for his own use, and would seek to exchange the surplus for the venison of the hunter, or the hides of the tanner; or he would purchase with his implements the services of the hut-builder to erect and improve his dwelling. A corresponding division would arise in civil and military duties. The bravest and most enterprising would be the leader in war; the best spokesman the orator, and diplomatist of the tribe; and those more subtle and observing, would probably devote themselves to legislation, law, and the mysteries of religion.
Whether this is precisely the mode in which trades and professions originated, it is not, perhaps, essential to ascertain. A more important inquiry than into the origin of occupations will consist in showing how much more efficient industry becomes by being concentrated on a single process or operation.
First, the division of employment saves time. A man carrying on different occupations, in passing from one to another, must change either his position, his place, his tools, or the direction of his mind, and in any case time is lost in the transition. Lawyers experience something of this in passing from one brief to another, or one court to another, to plead the cause of their clients. The General Post-office has been cited by Dr. Whately as an apt illustration of the division of labour. If each individual had his own letters to carry, the time lost and expense
incurred would be enormous; or even if the Post-office had not introduced various subdivisions of employment in its establishment_such as a separate post for each main road, and a district of adjacent streets